“I was quite amazed that you continued to engage him long into the night”

I was working (real work, not blog work) but I keep an eye on the blog on another window when working. This allows me to respond to worthwhile comments, eliminate spam that gets thru filters, and periodically add a post should I take a break and find something of interest in the RSS reader.

I don’t recall the specifics but I probably didn’t get to responding to the Harry Potter comment either as it came at a time whicn I was busy or due to the subject matter. Reviews of something like this are highly subjective and there is no right or wrong view on the book.

“A reply merely encourages them.”

Yes, I tried to keep replies brief in the hopes of avoiding a time consuming debate, but that didn’t work with Jason. The real problem was that this is just one of his arguments. As he isn’t concerned with either facts or logic, he could argue endlessly on multiple posts, wasting time without getting anywhere. I certainly have to wonder about people who have this much time to kill as there are lots of them going from blog to blog.

Even though he had some quite inaccurate comments on Kerry I especially didn’t think it was worth much time on this one. As it is an old thread very few people would see it. The vast majority of readers come from either RSS readers and from posts which are picked up by sources like Reuters and USA Today’s online sites. Such readers might click thorugh to the comments on the post they are reading, but they do not see the front page of the blog with recent discussions. I doubt more than a handful of people have seen Jason’s arguments here. Those who are likley to click on comments in old threads are probably regulars who wouldn’t believe what Jason was saying anyways.

]]>By: Bretthttp://liberalvaluesblog.com/2006/11/19/kerry-discusses-botched-joke-on-fox-news-sunday/comment-page-1/#comment-115015
Fri, 14 Sep 2007 19:04:55 +0000http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=651#comment-115015Yeah, I was quite amazed that you continued to engage him long into the night after it was clear that there was little hope that he could convinced of the superficiality and baseless nature of his arguments. I think it is very honorable that you make an effort to respond to a great many of the comments posted on your blog (except my rather lengthy review of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows at Post #1944, but I can see why you probably overlooked that one), but, sometimes, the personal and unseemly attacks of these guys’ comments don’t really deserve a response. A reply merely encourages them.

My primary motivation, however, for breaking that maxim was in the slim hope that “Jason” would read it and maybe have his self-righteous confidence be humbled a bit. Also, the mischaracterizations and untruths of his statements, especially of his smear of the very selective Boston College Law School, definitely deserved correction. It may not change his mind or any other similar minds, but at least his falsehoods have not gone unanswered.

“It is an unfortunate fact that superifical arguments have become the cornerstone of political life, so I feel it is necessary to combat such shallow and absurd declarations whenever they show up and threaten to undermine our nation’s political discourse.”

A worthy endeavor, and feel free to jump in, but its come to the point where it just isn’t practical for me to bother debating people like Jason over trivial issues such as this. It would be different if this was a hot topic, such as right after Kerry’s grades came out. Unfortunately I have limited time to spend blogging, and that time is far better spent in main blog posts which are seen by thousands as opposed to in the comments where only a small proportion of readers will see them.

I don’t know if you noticed, but Jason has attempted to start such arguments after multiple posts, usually with arguments as weak as this. It’s not as if there’s any chance of changing his mind with the facts. Plus we get a new “Jason” every week or two.

Most people with successful blogs find it necessary to avoid wasting time with such debates (and most of them don’t have as time consuming a profession as I do to contend with). Steve Benen addresses this directly in his About section:

I’m a conservative Republican who disagrees with everything you write. Can I contact you to begin a lengthy debate?

For the love of God, no. I appreciate spirited discourse as much as the next guy, but I’m afraid I’m not looking for a debate opponent right now.

As for the topic, you have many good points. I don’t have time right now to dig up the specifics. but at the time of the release on this there was also a lot of information comparing Kerry and Bush’s subsequent college careers beyond freshman year, including Kerry being chosen to give the address on graduation. Of course Kerry’s ultimate success in college is seen in where he was accepted to Law school.

There’s also the multiple business failures by George Bush where he had to be bailed out by his father’s friends, leading up to his failed presidency.

Much more can also be said on why the mission was not accomplished, but this is not going to convince someone with beliefs such as Jason’s. Anyone other than someone with such a narrow worldview would realize how absurd this was, making prolonged argument over this worthless.

]]>By: Bretthttp://liberalvaluesblog.com/2006/11/19/kerry-discusses-botched-joke-on-fox-news-sunday/comment-page-1/#comment-114846
Fri, 14 Sep 2007 06:43:33 +0000http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=651#comment-114846Wow. The most superficial argument on Liberal Values. Most of the time, these comments debates are high-minded exchanges of important issues, such as the eternal tension between personal liberty and the common good, but this one…well.

Jason Andrew, your words speak for themselves:

“I don’t know what you mean by the remainder of their college years, but I know Bush has been president for 8 years and Kerry is only a senator…so I think Bush has surpassed Kerry. I think Kerry has a law degree from an average law school. Bush has a harvard MBA. I think the Harvard MBA beats Kerry’s law degree. Where is it from? Boston college?”

Well, for one thing, Kerry got his law degree from Boston College Law School, which is one of the most selective law schools in the country. Also, a law degree is a law degree. Whether or not a law degree “beats” a MBA in value is open for debate, but it’s a still a freaking law degree.

Second point. To say that “president beats senator, I win!” is an incredibly juvenile perspective. John Kerry has been an respected senator for over two decades, while George W. Bush has only been president for seven years. Following your superficial worldview, I could say that Kerry beats Bush for years spent in their office. But that is, of course, a dishonest argument. I feel it is much better to value a person’s “worth” through their accomplishments in life, not what grades they got in college (which can be determined by numerous other factors), not how many years they spend in an office, and not the relative rank of their position. Especially in a representative republican government, these gauges do not readily translate into an accurate reading of a person’s “value” or “worth.” It is important to look beyond these mere vanities.

On a technical note, a senator is–under the democratic principles of the separation of powers–actually equal to the office of president. In today’s world, obviously, the presidency is definitely considered more “valuable” than a Senate seat, but it is ultimately what that person does in either office that determines their “worth.” Like how Senator Henry Clay is considered a more effective leader and thus more “valuable” than say, President James Buchancan, I believe Kerry has accomplished much more for his state and his country (Iran-Contra investigations, resolving the POW issue in Vietnam, etc.) in his twenty years as senator than Bush has in his seven years as president (his record speaks for itself).

That’s how one really judges success or failure. Not through grades or position. But through actual accomplishment. You’re free to disagree on whether or not Kerry is better than Bush, but insisting on arguing from a rather shallow position will get you nowhere.

I’m sorry that I donated so many words to such a frivolous debate on basically very small issues, but I felt that the primary failing of Alexander’s argument wasn’t being addressed by the ever brisk Ron Chusid. It is an unfortunate fact that superifical arguments have become the cornerstone of political life, so I feel it is necessary to combat such shallow and absurd declarations whenever they show up and threaten to undermine our nation’s political discourse.

(Also, a quick note. Jason, while you have every right to be skeptical of the mistreatment that the “Mission Accomplished” banner has gotten by all sides, saying that “the photo op could have meant the ship’s mission” is demonstratively untrue. The pomp of the event (the aircraft landing and the major victorious speech that followed) makes it clear that this was more than a routine photo-op. This was meant to be a triumphalist historical moment.)

“You see, I can’t lose this argument, because I don’t think Kerry is stupid or lacks depth”

You have the mistaken idea that I care to spend the time arguing with your absurd ideas. It’s not about winning or losing arguments. It’s about making sense, and you repeatedly fail to do that.

]]>By: Jason Andrewhttp://liberalvaluesblog.com/2006/11/19/kerry-discusses-botched-joke-on-fox-news-sunday/comment-page-1/#comment-114819
Fri, 14 Sep 2007 04:44:02 +0000http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=651#comment-114819And just because you disagree with Bush’s policies doesn’t mean he lacks depth. You probably just don’t understand his views because you have a different world view. A person with depth would understand that.
]]>By: Jason Andrewhttp://liberalvaluesblog.com/2006/11/19/kerry-discusses-botched-joke-on-fox-news-sunday/comment-page-1/#comment-114817
Fri, 14 Sep 2007 04:40:40 +0000http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=651#comment-114817You say “If you actually paid attention and got beyond your preconceptions you’d see that what liberals believe and what conservative commonly claim liberals believe are quite different.”

Well the same goes for you, Ron. Practice what you preach.

If the grade thing was a non-issue then why did Kerry wait until after the election to release his grades? He didn’t see it as a non-issue. And I am sure they both “screwed around” in college. Grades are some measure of intelligence when all else is equal. And I think Bush and Kerry’s situations were pretty similar.

I don’t know what you mean by the remainder of their college years, but I know Bush has been president for 8 years and Kerry is only a senator…so I think Bush has surpassed Kerry. I think Kerry has a law degree from an average law school. Bush has a harvard MBA. I think the Harvard MBA beats Kerry’s law degree. Where is it from? Boston college?

You see, I can’t lose this argument, because I don’t think Kerry is stupid or lacks depth. And I don’t know how you can say liberals don’t think Bush is stupid. I could probably find 100 quotes from prominent liberals saying that Bush is dumb. And what is the difference between lack of depth and being dumb? They are pretty similar.

Ron, you always give lefties the benefit of the doubt and will never do the same for conservatives and republicans. And you are doing it again by trying to downplay the fact that Bush got better grades than Kerry.

And I’ve written many times that the problem isn’t that Bush is dumb, but that he does have a lack of depth in his review of issues. You sure love to fall back on all these strawmen arguments. If you actually paid attention and got beyond your preconceptions you’d see that what liberals believe and what conservative commonly claim liberals believe are quite different.

The whole grade thing is a non-issue. It wasn’t even news. Writings on Kerry’s such as Brinkley’s book were already out quoting Kerry as admitting he screwed around his first year in school and got bad grades. That’s hardly a measure of intelligence. More importantly, compare the remainder of their college careers where Kerry did surpass Bush.

The whole point of criticizing Bush over the line is that the mission was in no means accomplished. This was more than a silly photo-op. It is a demonstration that the pre-war claims of a quick victory were not realistic.

“You only think that because you are liberal.”

If you actually read the site as opposed to assuming I’m a liberal Democrat you would see that I disagee with them on many issues. I associate more with liberals than conservatives as liberals are far more honest in their views and the methods by which they present them. I can disagree with many liberals and we can have a rational discussion based upon facts. (Obviously there are exceptions, and I’ve also had a number of posts critical of the nuttier aspects of the left here). On the other hand most currently active among the Republican quickly resort to distortion of the views of their opponents and avoidance of discussion of the actual issues.

]]>By: Jason Andrewhttp://liberalvaluesblog.com/2006/11/19/kerry-discusses-botched-joke-on-fox-news-sunday/comment-page-1/#comment-114804
Fri, 14 Sep 2007 04:09:43 +0000http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=651#comment-114804And the whole Bush is dumb thing. That is a total diversion from the issues. He isn’t dumb and any person with any sense would realize that. He just can’t speak very well.

Did you notice how after the election, Kerry released his Yale grades and he actually had worse grades than Bush? Kerry had some D’s and F’s. I think he was only one year behind Bush, so there is some pretty good evidence that Bush is smarter than Kerry. And we know Bush was probably drunk the whole time, and he still made better grades than Kerry. And I think Bush actually scored better on his military entrance exams than Kerry. And one more point, they don’t let dumb people fly figher jets. Bush flew fighter jets in the national guard.

And what about Al Gore? Didn’t he drop out of law school and some religious school too? I’ll bet Bush is smarter than Gore too.

]]>By: Jason Andrewhttp://liberalvaluesblog.com/2006/11/19/kerry-discusses-botched-joke-on-fox-news-sunday/comment-page-1/#comment-114803
Fri, 14 Sep 2007 04:03:33 +0000http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=651#comment-114803I just gave you two rational interpretations of the “mission accomplished” thing. Refute them if you think they are irrational. Do you agree with my two main reasons for going to Iraq? Do you disagree that they were both accomplished when he made the photo-op? Do you know for a fact that the ship wasn’t returning home after its mission was accomplished? I don’t think Bush was doing anything other politicians don’t do. He was doing a photo-op and I don’t see anything outrageous about the quote “mission accmplished” because as I just said, Sadaam was gone and we were able to make sure he didn’t have WMDs. I am not hypocritical like you because when I heard the Kerry joke, I thought it was taken out of context too. I am giving him the benefit of the doubt too. I don’t think he was making fun of the troops. So show the same fairness and say that Bush’s photo op wasn’t outrageous.

I am willing to concede that both sides take things out of context but I don’t think republicans do it more than democrats. You are fooling yourself if you think liberals stick to the issues more. You only think that because you are liberal. Damn man, show some objectivity. The whole mission accomplished thing was a total diversion from the issues. Who cares if the president did a silly photo-op. I think you are just jealous because he looked so manly in that flight suit….